|
|
| Line 9: |
Line 9: |
| | * '''[[/Archive2017 | 2017]]''' | | * '''[[/Archive2017 | 2017]]''' |
| | * '''[[/Archive2018 | 2018]]''' | | * '''[[/Archive2018 | 2018]]''' |
| | + | * '''[[/Archive2019 | 2019]]''' |
| | | | |
| | = Current = | | = Current = |
| | | | |
| − |
| |
| − | == [[Template:InfoBoxBattleMech]] ==
| |
| − | Hello there. I've [[BattleTechWiki talk:Project BattleMechs#New infobox|been told]] that you are the one to speak to about scripted/bot tasks.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I made some changes to [[Template:InfoBoxBattleMech]] to improve its functionality, but they do mean that [[:Category:Empty or nonstandard InfoBoxBattleMech tech base parameter|hundreds of mech articles]] need updating to use [http://www.sarna.net/wiki/index.php?title=Template%3AInfoBoxBattleMech%2Fdoc&type=revision&diff=447100&oldid=349082 the new parameters]. I don't know the first thing about bots or scripting to avoid having to do that by hand. Do you? [[User:Cease to Hope|Cease to Hope]] ([[User talk:Cease to Hope|talk]]) 19:50, 9 September 2017 (EDT)
| |
| − | :Hi [[User:Cease to Hope|Cease to Hope]]! If you have a database (CSV, spreadsheet, etc) of the 'Mechs and their corresponding Tech Base values, I can make a bot to update all of them. [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] ([[User talk:Nicjansma|talk]]) 21:44, 6 February 2018 (EST)
| |
| | | | |
| | ==Extra blocking checkbox for merging & deleting?== | | ==Extra blocking checkbox for merging & deleting?== |
| Line 26: |
Line 21: |
| | It would cut the time lost on spammers in half if the Merge & Delete function had a similar checkbox option to automatically block the IP the spambot account was created from. It should still be a checkbox because there are cases thinkable where I wouldn't want to block the IP (e.g. we've had a legit user who requested his account be deleted for good, but who wasn't a spammer and would still use the wiki). [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 02:16, 11 January 2018 (EST) | | It would cut the time lost on spammers in half if the Merge & Delete function had a similar checkbox option to automatically block the IP the spambot account was created from. It should still be a checkbox because there are cases thinkable where I wouldn't want to block the IP (e.g. we've had a legit user who requested his account be deleted for good, but who wasn't a spammer and would still use the wiki). [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 02:16, 11 January 2018 (EST) |
| | : That is a really good idea. I checked on the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:UserMerge UserMerge extension's Page] but no one has asked for that feature yet. I'd suggest proposing it there to see if anyone picks it up -- if not, I can see about adding a checkbox some rainy day :) [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] ([[User talk:Nicjansma|talk]]) 21:50, 6 February 2018 (EST) | | : That is a really good idea. I checked on the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:UserMerge UserMerge extension's Page] but no one has asked for that feature yet. I'd suggest proposing it there to see if anyone picks it up -- if not, I can see about adding a checkbox some rainy day :) [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] ([[User talk:Nicjansma|talk]]) 21:50, 6 February 2018 (EST) |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Edits missing on Recent Edits page==
| |
| − | Something is still or again broken: It seems the Recent Changes are skipping edits. As of today, for example, the list stubbornly refuses to acknowledge or report several edits [[User:Dmon]] made to my talk page, while curiously showing intermediate edits in reply to Dmon by myself and [[User:Pserratv]]. We've reported this problem before, alongside the Categories not updating; but now it looks as if it might be a separate issue that either wasn't fixed in the latest upgrades, or has cropped up again. It is naturally near impossible to spot, it was just lucky coincidence that I was informed of a New Message to my talk page (without a corresponding Recent Edit) or I'd neve have found something was amiss. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 10:18, 7 May 2018 (EDT)
| |
| − | :Hey Frabby, next time this occurs can you try to keep track of the time/date you made the edit, and the pages it was made on? (or if you still remember the details from this post) I can then look into the database to see what's going on. [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] ([[User talk:Nicjansma|talk]]) 10:48, 2 June 2018 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | == Spambots ==
| |
| − | Hi Nic,<br>
| |
| − | We're getting hit with spambots again - anonymous IPs posting spoof pages. All of the pages tend to follow a common format in their title, and I was wondering if it was possible to adjust Sarna to refuse to allow the creation of article pages containing specific words - for example, I can't imagine we're ever going to have articles here that need the words "Yahoo" or "Netflix" or "Google" or "Paypal", and if we could auto-block the creation of those pages, it would cut down on the spam a bit. I'd prefer to cut down on the spam a bit by finding the spammers and malleting their fingers with a lump hammer until they learn the error of their ways, but a block on new pages would probably be more productive in the short term, if less satisfying. [[User:BrokenMnemonic|BrokenMnemonic]] ([[User talk:BrokenMnemonic|talk]]) 03:02, 8 May 2018 (EDT)
| |
| − | :"Yahoo" shouldn't be blacklisted. We have several links to Yahoo videos of computer game content, for example. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 04:14, 8 May 2018 (EDT)
| |
| − | ::I wasn't talking about blacklisting Yahoo as a term in general - just blocking it from article names. [[User:BrokenMnemonic|BrokenMnemonic]] ([[User talk:BrokenMnemonic|talk]]) 05:05, 8 May 2018 (EDT)
| |
| − | :::Ah ok. Yes, in article names it can and perhaps should be blacklisted.
| |
| − | :::In case you're wondering why I raised this topic, I got myself autblocked by the system when I archived my talk page last time - because another user had raised spam reports on my talk page that contained words which were later blacklisted. When I created the archive article, zapp, autoblock. Luckily admin rights apparently override autoblock and I found I could unblock myself. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 10:04, 8 May 2018 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | : Absolutely agree with blocking the creation of certain pages that utilize certain words...so please respond to that request first.
| |
| − | : However, I'd suggest removing "[[Special:ListGroupRights|createpage]]" and "createtalk" from the "all" group, requiring one to be in the "User" (i.e., an Editor) group to do so. Yes, it means someone who sees a need for a "missing" article to go thru the registration process, but at this point, how many non-Editors are going to find a critical "missing" article and not be bothered to register? The time saved for Admins from deleting and blocking IPs would be beneficial.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 12:10, 11 May 2018 (EDT)
| |
| − | ::Making account creation require human authentication is a good idea as well. And also maybe put a 4 hour waiting period on account creation before you can create pages.[[User:Amaroq Dricaldari|~Amaroq Starwind~]] ([[User talk:Amaroq Dricaldari|talk]]) 16:02, 11 May 2018 (EDT)
| |
| − | :::I am very much in favour of making account creation a requirement of editing pages, we are currently experiencing the expected influx of Video Game players as well as the spambots, and some of them are editing pages with opinions rather than using the talk pages. So I think we need to stay on top of that too.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 05:39, 12 May 2018 (EDT)
| |
| − | ::::Aff. This should include notes on various pages such as "This page is in regards to the novels and to the Tabletop game. For other uses of the term, see..." and "These articles are intended to provide factual information. Please leave personal opinions to the [[dummy page|Talk Page.]]" [[User:Amaroq Dricaldari|~Amaroq Starwind~]] ([[User talk:Amaroq Dricaldari|talk]]) 11:50, 16 May 2018 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | :Okay, Admins: I found the Abuse Filter and I've added the following words to it: Yahoo, Netflix, Google, Paypal. I will be adding more words to it, as I see pages that get created that have no relevancy to Sarna (there were many today). Plus, I directed the filter to "Prevent the user from performing the action in question." I decided not to autoblock IPs or new users doing this, just so we can have human eyes reviewing that decision. (I'm definitely open to doing so, but today I had a Frabby avatar on my shoulder suggesting otherwise.) --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 18:20, 18 May 2018 (EDT)
| |
| − | ::In addition, Revanche and I have been working on [http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter Abuse Filter #3] which blocks ''New users adding external links on their user page''. We've made some edits, and it [http://www.sarna.net/wiki/index.php?title=Special:AbuseLog&wpSearchFilter=3 seems to be working well], having blocked 3 edits/accounts since yesterday that were SPAM. Before yesterday, this rule wasn't working because it only applied to non-autoconfirmed users (see below).
| |
| − | ::We previously had not configured MediaWiki's <code>$wgAutoConfirmAge</code> or <code>$wgAutoConfirmCount</code>. This meant all users were [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Autoconfirmed_users autoconfirmed] immediately, which skips some of the Abuse Filter rules. I've now set them to 14 days and 5 edits, respectively. This should make the Abuse Filter rules work on all newly-created accounts.
| |
| − | ::I'm open to removing <code>createpage</code> and <code>createtalk</code> from <code>all</code>, if others agree.
| |
| − | ::I'm not sure we should require an account for ''all'' edits though, as we've historically allowed edits even if not logged in (and have had multiple discussions around this).
| |
| − | ::[[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] ([[User talk:Nicjansma|talk]]) 10:43, 2 June 2018 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | == Founders Awards ==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Good day nic, I would like to give you a gentle nudge about getting the Founders Awards up as we have several new editors who I would like to show appreciation for :-)--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 07:40, 5 February 2019 (EST)
| |
| − | : Thanks for the prod, added! [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] ([[User talk:Nicjansma|talk]]) 09:54, 7 February 2019 (EST)
| |
| − | ::Thank you :-)--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 10:09, 7 February 2019 (EST)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | == Cannot Log-In or Reset Password ==
| |
| − | I am henryjones000. My email should be henryjones000@yahoo.com. I get an error when I try to reset my password. Help?
| |
| | | | |
| | == Max article size? == | | == Max article size? == |
| | Hi Nic, is there a limit on the size of articles? Some, like the product list, are very long already. And if we should try to implement nice sortable tables then the article size may double... [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 15:34, 20 May 2019 (EDT) | | Hi Nic, is there a limit on the size of articles? Some, like the product list, are very long already. And if we should try to implement nice sortable tables then the article size may double... [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 15:34, 20 May 2019 (EDT) |
| | + | : The default max article size is 2 MB [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgMaxArticleSize $wgMaxArticleSize], aka 2,196,608 bytes. We could increase it if needed. The [[List_of_BattleTech_products]] is only 87,000 bytes right now. |
| | + | :Why would enabling sortable tables double the size though? That should all be done via JavaScript, with the <code>sortable</code> class added to the table. [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] ([[User talk:Nicjansma|talk]]) 09:23, 28 August 2019 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| | == Star League commands order == | | == Star League commands order == |
| Line 74: |
Line 37: |
| | I tried to make this a general query, but have no idea on how to do it.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 10:31, 18 July 2019 (EDT) | | I tried to make this a general query, but have no idea on how to do it.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 10:31, 18 July 2019 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| − | == Proposed Organization of the Star League Forces (final) ==
| + | I've created and explained a proposal here: [[:Category talk:Star League Defense Force Commands]], could you review and share your insights?--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 08:56, 7 August 2019 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| − | I've created and explained a proposal here: [[:Category talk:Star League Defense Force Commands]], could you review and share your insights?--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 08:56, 7 August 2019 (EDT)
| + | : Thanks for leading the charge on this! [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] ([[User talk:Nicjansma|talk]]) 09:23, 28 August 2019 (EDT) |
Archive
Talk Archives:
Current
In the everlasting battle against spambots, I have merged literally thousands of spambot accounts into Anonymous. Merge and delete users is really a fantastic tool.
A suggestion though: In almost all cases, I manually block the user (spambot) in question first before merging & deleting, in order to blacklist the IP adress. The blocking function offers several helpful checkboxes, and I usually check them all except for the last one.
It would cut the time lost on spammers in half if the Merge & Delete function had a similar checkbox option to automatically block the IP the spambot account was created from. It should still be a checkbox because there are cases thinkable where I wouldn't want to block the IP (e.g. we've had a legit user who requested his account be deleted for good, but who wasn't a spammer and would still use the wiki). Frabby (talk) 02:16, 11 January 2018 (EST)
- That is a really good idea. I checked on the UserMerge extension's Page but no one has asked for that feature yet. I'd suggest proposing it there to see if anyone picks it up -- if not, I can see about adding a checkbox some rainy day :) Nicjansma (talk) 21:50, 6 February 2018 (EST)
Max article size?
Hi Nic, is there a limit on the size of articles? Some, like the product list, are very long already. And if we should try to implement nice sortable tables then the article size may double... Frabby (talk) 15:34, 20 May 2019 (EDT)
- The default max article size is 2 MB $wgMaxArticleSize, aka 2,196,608 bytes. We could increase it if needed. The List_of_BattleTech_products is only 87,000 bytes right now.
- Why would enabling sortable tables double the size though? That should all be done via JavaScript, with the
sortable class added to the table. Nicjansma (talk) 09:23, 28 August 2019 (EDT)
Star League commands order
Hi Nicjansma,
I've seen that the Star League commands order is different from the rest. Units assigned in sub-level commands do appear also in the root (something that does not happen in other Military Commands Categories. Am I right if I consider this Category incorrectly done?
I also think there are categories missing that should help reorganize this a bit better? The level of sub commands can be huge, and I do not even know which is the best way to order them.
I tried to make this a general query, but have no idea on how to do it.--Pserratv (talk) 10:31, 18 July 2019 (EDT)
I've created and explained a proposal here: Category talk:Star League Defense Force Commands, could you review and share your insights?--Pserratv (talk) 08:56, 7 August 2019 (EDT)
- Thanks for leading the charge on this! Nicjansma (talk) 09:23, 28 August 2019 (EDT)
